Toronto's walk with Israel is the largest annual solidarity walk in the diaspora. Today we raised money for citizens of Bat Yam, a city (about the size of St Catharines, Ontario) that is home to many Ethiopian jews.
The walk started off with a long series of speeches (mostly unnecessary, IMHO) by Canadian politicians, Jewish community leaders etc before hearing from the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Now, if I were to place myself in the Israeli political world, I would tend towards the Mapam/Mapai/Labour party end of things. I would not normally consider my political beliefs to fall in the Revisionist stream, represented by Mr Netanyahu's Likud Party. However, he gave a wonderful speech hitting all the right notes. His speech was middle of the road Zionist in tone and content.
I wish I had seen some more union banners there. Unionists should be walking in support of relief of poverty (in Bat Yam as well as elsewhere). Unionists should be walking in support of the only country in the middle east with a strong and independent trade union movement. Unionists should be marching in support of a democracy (as flawed as every other democracy including our own) that shares similar human rights, rule of law and social values. We should have been visible among the 15,000 or more walkers this year. Anyone keen to walk next year as a grop under the Trade Unionists United for Israel banner? If so, let me know.
Sadly, some chose to throw their lot in with Hizbullah (a terrorist group in Lebanon that is committed to genocide and funded and armed by Iran) and Hamas (ditto in Gaza).
(reader's note...I didn't make this video and I am not supportive of the "various kooks" label...)
Here is another video about the walk that was really nice:
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Monday, May 17, 2010
Which side are you on?
Those who fashionably attach themselves to the lie of Israeli "apartheid" need to be aware of what they are actually allying themselves to.
Here is a simple exchange -which you need to watch to the end - between David Horowitz and the president of the Muslim student association at UCSD. Now, don't get me wrong. I do not hold a brief for David Horowitz or his political views.
However, his interlocutor here is interesting. Here she admits - publically - that she supports Hamas and Hizbullah (two genocidal clerical fascist organizations) and would like Jews to gather together in Israel to make it easier to eliminate Jews. She supports genocide and calls for genocide.
It is clear which side she is on. Which side are you on?
Here is a simple exchange -which you need to watch to the end - between David Horowitz and the president of the Muslim student association at UCSD. Now, don't get me wrong. I do not hold a brief for David Horowitz or his political views.
However, his interlocutor here is interesting. Here she admits - publically - that she supports Hamas and Hizbullah (two genocidal clerical fascist organizations) and would like Jews to gather together in Israel to make it easier to eliminate Jews. She supports genocide and calls for genocide.
It is clear which side she is on. Which side are you on?
Monday, May 10, 2010
Israel is in the OECD!
Great news...Israel was accepted today as the 32nd member of the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). Israel, Estonia and Slovenia were all asked to join the now 34 country economic organization.
As readers of this blog will recall, the Palestinian Authority, backed by its fellow travelers elsewhere, called for trade unionists to block adhesion of Israel to the OECD. To understand matters fully, a country needs the unanimous backing of the organization in order to join. That means that the PA was unsucessful with 31 sovereign governments.
There are some who oppose the OECD in principle (because it advances the market economy). I understand that point of view. It is a root and branch socialist point of view. However, those who opposed Israel's adhesion to the organization were not doing this from a socialist point of view. Rather, it was a deliberate attempt to isolate the Jewish state qua Jewish state. Of course the origin of the OECD was as the agency that administered the Marshall Plan in postwar Europe.
I am of the opinion that the Marshall PLan, by building up the economies of war-torn western Europe did much to create the environment of peace in Europe. Engagement and mutual economic interest can do much to overcome political divisions. Once again, one of the key problems with the BDS movement is that it works against peace. We should be encouraging the integration of the Palestinian and Israeli economies so that they are mutually dependent.
As readers of this blog will recall, the Palestinian Authority, backed by its fellow travelers elsewhere, called for trade unionists to block adhesion of Israel to the OECD. To understand matters fully, a country needs the unanimous backing of the organization in order to join. That means that the PA was unsucessful with 31 sovereign governments.
There are some who oppose the OECD in principle (because it advances the market economy). I understand that point of view. It is a root and branch socialist point of view. However, those who opposed Israel's adhesion to the organization were not doing this from a socialist point of view. Rather, it was a deliberate attempt to isolate the Jewish state qua Jewish state. Of course the origin of the OECD was as the agency that administered the Marshall Plan in postwar Europe.
I am of the opinion that the Marshall PLan, by building up the economies of war-torn western Europe did much to create the environment of peace in Europe. Engagement and mutual economic interest can do much to overcome political divisions. Once again, one of the key problems with the BDS movement is that it works against peace. We should be encouraging the integration of the Palestinian and Israeli economies so that they are mutually dependent.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
PA boycott talk
The PA has recently decided to boycott goods made in Israeli villages in Judea and Samaria. It has also decided to ban Palestinians from working in those same areas. To give a flavour of this boycott, here is a quotation from an Arab watermelon seller:
Watermelons with a nationality!
What I don't understand from the point of view of Palestinian or Jewish workers is the deliberate endangering of employment opportunities for workers facing high levels of unemployment. A large number of Arab workers are employed in Israeli villages across the Green Line and enjoy the full protection of Israeli labour law. The money they earn goes right back into the Palestinian economy. They work in these villages alongside Jewish workers thereby possibly building some roots of cross-national worker solidarity.
In addition, the boycott clearly is in violation of the Paris Agreement (Annex IV of the Gaza-Jericho Agreement). This agreement (which does not distinguish between Jewish villages on one side or the other of the Green Line, states (in part):
and later
As workers, we should be opposed to such a boycott - it only hurts workers and their families. Moreover, by undermining already signed agreements, it only weakens the prospect for peace. For peace to be assured, signed commitments need to be honoured.
Unfortunately, this latest "provocation" got little play in the mainstream press.
“These are Arab watermelons,” he said with some feeling. He pointed to the sticker on the melons, which, although it boasted an Israeli mobile phone number, was written in Arabic. “These are not Jewish,” he said. “And they are sweet.”
Watermelons with a nationality!
What I don't understand from the point of view of Palestinian or Jewish workers is the deliberate endangering of employment opportunities for workers facing high levels of unemployment. A large number of Arab workers are employed in Israeli villages across the Green Line and enjoy the full protection of Israeli labour law. The money they earn goes right back into the Palestinian economy. They work in these villages alongside Jewish workers thereby possibly building some roots of cross-national worker solidarity.
In addition, the boycott clearly is in violation of the Paris Agreement (Annex IV of the Gaza-Jericho Agreement). This agreement (which does not distinguish between Jewish villages on one side or the other of the Green Line, states (in part):
Both sides will attempt to maintain the normality of movement of labor between them
and later
Each side will do its best to avoid damage to the industry of the other side and will take into consideration the concerns of the other side in its industrial policy.
As workers, we should be opposed to such a boycott - it only hurts workers and their families. Moreover, by undermining already signed agreements, it only weakens the prospect for peace. For peace to be assured, signed commitments need to be honoured.
Unfortunately, this latest "provocation" got little play in the mainstream press.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Thinkin' about boycotts
So, a facebook friend had a link up to a Jordanian site calling for the boycott of numerous US and European companies. The post states simply:
It then goes on to list 15 corporations.
Let's start with the fact that this is a Jordanian campaign. Article 7 of the Israel-Jordan Peace Agreement requires the parties "to remove all discriminatory barriers to normal economic relations, to terminate economic boycotts directed at each other, and to co-operate in terminating boycotts against either Party by third parties." This campaign is thus in violation of a solemn treaty entered into by the Hashemite kingdom.
Second, Jordanian citizenship law deny citizenship to Jews (there are no Jews in Jordan). During Jordanian occupation of Judea and Samaria, Jews were excluded from Jordanian citizenship by law.
Third, let's look at just the first company listed: Starbucks. Starbucks doesn't actually operate in Israel (it tried to but lost money and left the market). It does operate in a number of Arab countries. It does negotiate with unions (one of the only coffee chains that has unionized workers). So, why is it targeted?
Here is the simple answer:
- just so it is not lost on the reader, in the same website where countries with startbucks locations are listed (with Muslim ones in bold), Israel (Palestine) is listed in bold. There are two obvious problems with this. First, Starbucks doesn't do business in Israel at the current time. The second problem is that Israel is not a Muslim state.
To put it plainly, this kind of boycott, based on the ethnicity of the owner, is simply a carrying forward of the Arab boycott (which was simply a carrying forward of the Nazi boycott). Starting in 1936, Arab leaders called for a boycott of Jewish businesses in the Palestine Mandate. This policy was then broadened by the Arab league in the aftermath of the 1948 war (in which the stated objectives of the Arab armies was the liquidation of the Jewish population of Israel). The current call for boycotts simply continues this pattern.
Should trade unionists be supporting such actions? Boycotts based on ethnicity? Boycotts whose origins are clearly racist? Boycotts that violate signed peace treaties? Really? Gimme a break.
Below is a list of companies in Amman that support Israel. Do not purchase any of their products under any circumstances because they will donate a part of their profits to Israel.
It then goes on to list 15 corporations.
Let's start with the fact that this is a Jordanian campaign. Article 7 of the Israel-Jordan Peace Agreement requires the parties "to remove all discriminatory barriers to normal economic relations, to terminate economic boycotts directed at each other, and to co-operate in terminating boycotts against either Party by third parties." This campaign is thus in violation of a solemn treaty entered into by the Hashemite kingdom.
Second, Jordanian citizenship law deny citizenship to Jews (there are no Jews in Jordan). During Jordanian occupation of Judea and Samaria, Jews were excluded from Jordanian citizenship by law.
Third, let's look at just the first company listed: Starbucks. Starbucks doesn't actually operate in Israel (it tried to but lost money and left the market). It does operate in a number of Arab countries. It does negotiate with unions (one of the only coffee chains that has unionized workers). So, why is it targeted?
Here is the simple answer:
In summary. Starbucks’ chair Howard Schutltz (sic) is an active zionist (sic) whose own activities include running propaganda seminars on behalf of Israel across campuses in both North America and Israel.. Let me put it plainer, Howard Schultz is a JEW! Well that makes things clearer, doesn't it!
- just so it is not lost on the reader, in the same website where countries with startbucks locations are listed (with Muslim ones in bold), Israel (Palestine) is listed in bold. There are two obvious problems with this. First, Starbucks doesn't do business in Israel at the current time. The second problem is that Israel is not a Muslim state.
To put it plainly, this kind of boycott, based on the ethnicity of the owner, is simply a carrying forward of the Arab boycott (which was simply a carrying forward of the Nazi boycott). Starting in 1936, Arab leaders called for a boycott of Jewish businesses in the Palestine Mandate. This policy was then broadened by the Arab league in the aftermath of the 1948 war (in which the stated objectives of the Arab armies was the liquidation of the Jewish population of Israel). The current call for boycotts simply continues this pattern.
Should trade unionists be supporting such actions? Boycotts based on ethnicity? Boycotts whose origins are clearly racist? Boycotts that violate signed peace treaties? Really? Gimme a break.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Why have I created this blog?
I have created this blog to provide a space on the web for Canadian trade unionists who support Israel.
Over the past several years, some within the Canadian and international labour movements have engaged in campaigns designed to denigrate the State of Israel. Those trade unionists who have attempted to demonize the State of Israel do not represent the views of rank and file trade unionists in Canada.
As a result, a number of trade unionists from various national unions have come together to provide a resource for trade uinonists who support Israel. We do so on the firm conviction that support for Israel is consistent with deeply held trade union values. We also do so on the deep conviction that the path to peace in the Middle East cannot come through the demonization and isolation of the Jewish state.
The launch of this site was driven by the recent "call" for trade unionists to use May Day to protest the possible adhesion of the State of Israel to the OECD. A "call" like this exemplifies the problem and makes it clear what underlies this anti-Israel campaign.
Why? First, May Day is a day of international worker solidarity. It also happens to be the only holiday celebrated by both Israeli and Palestinian workers. This is a day meant to celebrate the unity of the international working class - not a day to divide workers based on their nationality. Second, the State of Israel has a free, vibrant and democratic trade union movement. Trade unionists should not be attempting to isolate such a country - especially on May Day. Third, trade unionists have not made such a "call" concerning the adhesion of other countries, in particular other countries with truly problematic human rights and trade union rights records. For instance, both South Korea and Turkey belong to the OECD - and neither can claim to have a free trade union movement.
As a trade unionist, I cannot support such a call. In fact, we must mobilize to expose the double standards, to inform, educate and organize. If you would like to help out, let me know.
Mikael
Over the past several years, some within the Canadian and international labour movements have engaged in campaigns designed to denigrate the State of Israel. Those trade unionists who have attempted to demonize the State of Israel do not represent the views of rank and file trade unionists in Canada.
As a result, a number of trade unionists from various national unions have come together to provide a resource for trade uinonists who support Israel. We do so on the firm conviction that support for Israel is consistent with deeply held trade union values. We also do so on the deep conviction that the path to peace in the Middle East cannot come through the demonization and isolation of the Jewish state.
The launch of this site was driven by the recent "call" for trade unionists to use May Day to protest the possible adhesion of the State of Israel to the OECD. A "call" like this exemplifies the problem and makes it clear what underlies this anti-Israel campaign.
Why? First, May Day is a day of international worker solidarity. It also happens to be the only holiday celebrated by both Israeli and Palestinian workers. This is a day meant to celebrate the unity of the international working class - not a day to divide workers based on their nationality. Second, the State of Israel has a free, vibrant and democratic trade union movement. Trade unionists should not be attempting to isolate such a country - especially on May Day. Third, trade unionists have not made such a "call" concerning the adhesion of other countries, in particular other countries with truly problematic human rights and trade union rights records. For instance, both South Korea and Turkey belong to the OECD - and neither can claim to have a free trade union movement.
As a trade unionist, I cannot support such a call. In fact, we must mobilize to expose the double standards, to inform, educate and organize. If you would like to help out, let me know.
Mikael
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)